Dr Hammesfahr specifically said vertebral and cord injuries. I don't see anyway you can prove there was a soft tissue injury at the time.
And who cares if it "goes with" Dr. Hammesfahr's finding? I do not represent Dr. Hammesfahr.
My mistake. You quoted him often and seemed to rely on his testimony. He was the only doctor I noted who claimed there was a neck injury of any kind, which you accepted despite other docs saying her neck rigidity was decerbrate rigidity. I can't remember if it was you or bjs1779 who were upset when I pointed out his known lie about being a Nobel prize nominee.
No, he said his findings were consistent with them. I think he came to believe she did have such an injury, but he also allowed that she might not have. That view's no crime.
>> ...which you accepted despite other docs saying her neck rigidity was decerbrate rigidity
Don't tell me what I accept. The "other docs" in this case included Dr. Hammesfahr, and I made myself clear that they all took a ordinary and reasonable view. I just wanted to look further into the question. It might hold clues.
>> I can't remember if it was you or bjs1779 who were upset when I pointed out his known lie about being a Nobel prize nominee.
Nobody's upset. It's an ad hominem attack. You insist you are only interested in medical issues, yes? This ain't one.